Seventh Circuit:

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections violated the RLUIPA when it refused to allow a Muslim inmate to possess prayer oil, and the RLUIPA was not unconstitutional under the Spending and Commerce Clauses, the Tenth Amendment, or the Establishment Clause because the Act was a valid exercise of Congress’ Spending Clause authority, the Commerce Clause or the Tenth Amendment did not provide an independent constitutional bar to conditions imposed on states’ receipt of federal funding through the enactment of the RLUIPA, and the enactment of the RLUIPA did not violate the Establishment Clause because it was not a government advancement of religion. Charles v. Verhagen, No. 02-3572 (7th Cir. Oct. 30, 2003).

The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the city's zoning ordinance, which required a special use permit to operate a church in specified areas of the city, substantially burdened religious exercise, and the ordinance’s amendments brought the ordinance into compliance with RLUIPA’s non-discrimination provisions. Civil Liberties for Urban Believers v. City of Chicago, No. 01-4030 (7th Cir. August 20, 2003).

Other Federal Districts:

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act provision prohibiting local governments from imposing special land use regulations on religious organizations was not unconstitutional under the Tenth and Fourteenth Amendments because the Act did not impermissibly advance religion, it did not amount to the federal zoning of county land, and it represented a valid exercise of Congress’ enforcement power under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. U.S. v. Maui County, No. CIV.03-00362SPK/KSC (D. Hawaii Dec. 29, 2003).  

To the extent that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) was applicable where a burden, or its removal, affected or would affect interstate commerce or where a burden was imposed pursuant to a system in which the government made “individualized assessments,” the RLUIPA exceeded Congress’s enforcement powers under the Fourteenth Amendment, and the subsection of the RLUIPA applicable where the substantial burden on religious exercise  affects commerce among the several States was not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. Elsinore Christian Center v. City of Lake Elsinore, No. CV 01-04842 SVW(RCX) (C.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2003).